aadimanav
06-03 11:41 AM
This is my third EAD renewal. My 485 is pending at NSC. I am in CA. All my previous EADs/APs etc were filed at NSC.
This time when my EAD renewal is filed (by my new attorney, in new company) I got receipt Number starting with MSC.
Who decides where to file MSC? What's the criteria to file at MSC? Shouldn't it be file at NSC?
Is this a mistake?
This time when my EAD renewal is filed (by my new attorney, in new company) I got receipt Number starting with MSC.
Who decides where to file MSC? What's the criteria to file at MSC? Shouldn't it be file at NSC?
Is this a mistake?
wallpaper Compaq Evo N610C Keyboard
paragpujara
10-18 09:35 AM
It could be for photographs / copies of personal pages of the passport / missing signature / Photo Id.
Head2GC
09-12 07:29 PM
Hello,
I got my I-140 Approved (EB3 - Jan 2004) with Company A. Can i use the approval notice and get my H1B extended for 3 years from a different company ? Please advice as this will help me a lot.
Thanks in advance:confused::rolleyes:
- Head2GC
I got my I-140 Approved (EB3 - Jan 2004) with Company A. Can i use the approval notice and get my H1B extended for 3 years from a different company ? Please advice as this will help me a lot.
Thanks in advance:confused::rolleyes:
- Head2GC
2011 Compaq Evo N610C: Schlappe 500
minimalist
11-29 01:51 PM
Online EAD status says Card production ordered. Not received card yet. Is there any memo/ lawyer opinion that says it is OK to work that as a basis for employment eligibility?
more...
Jaime
07-25 10:14 AM
We need to be on the lookout for any new developments. How are we doing with the lobbying? What else can we do? Any updates from IV Core? Thanks!
martinvisalaw
05-13 10:08 AM
It shouldn't have any negative effect. It would be better to withdraw the application, rather than just abandon it.
more...
Macaca
04-27 09:43 AM
Sen. Luddite Strikes Again (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/26/AR2007042602257.html) -- Once more, a mystery Republican blocks electronic filing for Senate candidates, Friday, April 27, 2007
JUST AS she did on April 17, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) went to the Senate floor to call for unanimous consent on a common-sense bill that would require candidates to file their campaign finance reports electronically. And just as he or she did on April 17, Sen. Ima Luddite (R-Who Knows Where) voiced opposition. This time the mouthpiece was Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.). "On behalf of the Republican side," he said, "I object." We object to the obstruction.
Honestly, what is the big deal here? Filing campaign finance reports electronically has been standard operating procedure for candidates for the House of Representatives and the White House for years -- as it has been for political parties, political action committees and "527" groups. Yet Senate candidates are still trudging down to the Senate Office of Public Records with paper copies of their reports, which are then passed along to the Federal Election Commission, which sends them to a vendor that punches in the information and zaps it back to the FEC electronically. That finally makes them widely available, sometimes too late for voters to see who's donating to whom and how the money is being spent. With this seeming fear of modernity, it's a wonder the Senate isn't calculating budgets with an abacus. Or is it a fear of disclosure?
After the bill was blocked, Ms. Feinstein, chairman of the Senate Rules and Administration Committee, said, "It is very hard for me to understand who could oppose this and what their reason for opposing it could be." It is very hard for us, too. Sen. Luddite -- whoever he or she may be -- should come out of the shadows and explain the irrational fear that is keeping the Senate from joining the rest of us in the 21st century. Senator anonymous -- Another Day, Another Hold On Finance Bill (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/26/AR2007042602249.html) By Matthew Mosk (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/matthew+mosk/), Washington Post Staff Writer, Friday, April 27, 2007
Sen. Anonymous struck again yesterday.
The infamous unnamed senator (or senators) has for more than a week blocked passage of legislation that would require Senate candidates to file campaign finance reports electronically.
Electronic filings would make the names of campaign donors readily available -- it's how members of the House and presidential candidates have been doing it for years. When Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) first brought the bill to the floor last week, though, he was told that an unnamed lawmaker objected.
Long-standing Senate custom allows the objection of a single senator to stop a bill in its tracks -- it's known as a secret hold. A measure that passed the Senate earlier this year, and awaits a House vote, would eliminate the practice.
The hold unleashed a torrent of activity on the Internet, as bloggers tried to flush out the identity of the senator responsible for the hold. But after an onslaught of phone calls to Senate offices, the bloggers have no answer. No one owned up to being the culprit.
Yesterday, the bill's sponsor tried again. And again, the Republican floor leader objected. A spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said he is sure the name of the secret senator is known "in the cloakroom," but he said that misses the point.
"A hold can't stop something from coming to the floor," Don Stewart said. "It can only stop it from being pushed through without a full and open debate on the bill."
That's true -- sponsors had been trying to pass the bill by unanimous consent, which does not permit amendment or debate. But Feingold told the liberal blog Daily Kos that the path was typical for a bill with 35 bipartisan co-sponsors that did not elicit a single objection in committee.
Writing on the blog yesterday, Feingold said: "The fact is that someone anonymously blocked the bill, . . . that person has made no effort to resolve his or her concerns with us, and the Republican leadership won't even tell us who that person is."
JUST AS she did on April 17, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) went to the Senate floor to call for unanimous consent on a common-sense bill that would require candidates to file their campaign finance reports electronically. And just as he or she did on April 17, Sen. Ima Luddite (R-Who Knows Where) voiced opposition. This time the mouthpiece was Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.). "On behalf of the Republican side," he said, "I object." We object to the obstruction.
Honestly, what is the big deal here? Filing campaign finance reports electronically has been standard operating procedure for candidates for the House of Representatives and the White House for years -- as it has been for political parties, political action committees and "527" groups. Yet Senate candidates are still trudging down to the Senate Office of Public Records with paper copies of their reports, which are then passed along to the Federal Election Commission, which sends them to a vendor that punches in the information and zaps it back to the FEC electronically. That finally makes them widely available, sometimes too late for voters to see who's donating to whom and how the money is being spent. With this seeming fear of modernity, it's a wonder the Senate isn't calculating budgets with an abacus. Or is it a fear of disclosure?
After the bill was blocked, Ms. Feinstein, chairman of the Senate Rules and Administration Committee, said, "It is very hard for me to understand who could oppose this and what their reason for opposing it could be." It is very hard for us, too. Sen. Luddite -- whoever he or she may be -- should come out of the shadows and explain the irrational fear that is keeping the Senate from joining the rest of us in the 21st century. Senator anonymous -- Another Day, Another Hold On Finance Bill (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/26/AR2007042602249.html) By Matthew Mosk (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/matthew+mosk/), Washington Post Staff Writer, Friday, April 27, 2007
Sen. Anonymous struck again yesterday.
The infamous unnamed senator (or senators) has for more than a week blocked passage of legislation that would require Senate candidates to file campaign finance reports electronically.
Electronic filings would make the names of campaign donors readily available -- it's how members of the House and presidential candidates have been doing it for years. When Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) first brought the bill to the floor last week, though, he was told that an unnamed lawmaker objected.
Long-standing Senate custom allows the objection of a single senator to stop a bill in its tracks -- it's known as a secret hold. A measure that passed the Senate earlier this year, and awaits a House vote, would eliminate the practice.
The hold unleashed a torrent of activity on the Internet, as bloggers tried to flush out the identity of the senator responsible for the hold. But after an onslaught of phone calls to Senate offices, the bloggers have no answer. No one owned up to being the culprit.
Yesterday, the bill's sponsor tried again. And again, the Republican floor leader objected. A spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said he is sure the name of the secret senator is known "in the cloakroom," but he said that misses the point.
"A hold can't stop something from coming to the floor," Don Stewart said. "It can only stop it from being pushed through without a full and open debate on the bill."
That's true -- sponsors had been trying to pass the bill by unanimous consent, which does not permit amendment or debate. But Feingold told the liberal blog Daily Kos that the path was typical for a bill with 35 bipartisan co-sponsors that did not elicit a single objection in committee.
Writing on the blog yesterday, Feingold said: "The fact is that someone anonymously blocked the bill, . . . that person has made no effort to resolve his or her concerns with us, and the Republican leadership won't even tell us who that person is."
2010 hp compaq evo n610c. Compaq EVO n610c P4-M; Compaq EVO n610c P4-M. GCKaMaara
asdfred
06-09 09:02 AM
EAD is for job
AP is for reentering US
Pending 485 is status in US
So, if she is not planning to work - then no need to apply for EAD
AP is for reentering US
Pending 485 is status in US
So, if she is not planning to work - then no need to apply for EAD
more...
abcdefg
01-28 03:53 PM
Hello!
I am pursuing part-time MBA while working for a company which has sponsored my GC. I am on EAD based on EB3 filing with PD of March 2005.
I plan to do a summer internship (10-12 weeks) at another company and need to understand the risks. This internship would be 40-hr/week so I will have to either
* quit my job and then search for another full-time job after internship is over, or
* take a Leave of Absence (LoA) for 3 months and come back to my current job
The first option is obviously very risky so I am inclined towards the second option though I don't know if my employer will grant me LoA. Could you please advice me whether doing an internship will be an issue later when my PD becomes current.
Thank you!!
GC Seeker
I am pursuing part-time MBA while working for a company which has sponsored my GC. I am on EAD based on EB3 filing with PD of March 2005.
I plan to do a summer internship (10-12 weeks) at another company and need to understand the risks. This internship would be 40-hr/week so I will have to either
* quit my job and then search for another full-time job after internship is over, or
* take a Leave of Absence (LoA) for 3 months and come back to my current job
The first option is obviously very risky so I am inclined towards the second option though I don't know if my employer will grant me LoA. Could you please advice me whether doing an internship will be an issue later when my PD becomes current.
Thank you!!
GC Seeker
hair sklep: Compaq Evo N610c
godspeed
06-28 03:17 PM
Folks,
(I know its a little early, please bear with me)Creating this thread to track and to get a handle on per SC approvals, please use this thread to post your approvals and kindly participate in the poll.
Intent is to track below SC's approvals
NSC
TSC
CSC
VSC
NCSC/CoP/Local Offices/Others
(I know its a little early, please bear with me)Creating this thread to track and to get a handle on per SC approvals, please use this thread to post your approvals and kindly participate in the poll.
Intent is to track below SC's approvals
NSC
TSC
CSC
VSC
NCSC/CoP/Local Offices/Others
more...
drona
07-25 11:09 PM
Calling Southern California activists/volunteers, please join our yahoo group for latest Meet-ups and info.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SC_Immigration_Voice/
You will have to request membership to the group. Please mention your IV handle/name in your request.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SC_Immigration_Voice/
You will have to request membership to the group. Please mention your IV handle/name in your request.
hot Compaq Evo Notebook N610c for
joshraj
04-08 04:44 PM
Hi Friends,
Starting this thread for NSC 140 applicants to track LUDs and Approvals.
The whole purpose of this thread is to get the indication of where NSC is with the appoval process for 140.
I hope every one who is connected to NSC for I140 application will update this thread.
Cheers!
JoshRaj
Starting this thread for NSC 140 applicants to track LUDs and Approvals.
The whole purpose of this thread is to get the indication of where NSC is with the appoval process for 140.
I hope every one who is connected to NSC for I140 application will update this thread.
Cheers!
JoshRaj
more...
house wallpaper Compaq EVO Keyboard
hibworker
12-02 02:29 PM
Each application is seperate as each one is for a seperate future job. Filing a new EB2 labor will have no effect on your existing EB3 app.
You should not be getting RFE on new app due to old app being pending.
You should not be getting RFE on new app due to old app being pending.
tattoo hair for Compaq Evo N610c
joshraj
04-08 04:44 PM
Hi Friends,
Starting this thread for NSC 140 applicants to track LUDs and Approvals.
The whole purpose of this thread is to get the indication of where NSC is with the appoval process for 140.
I hope every one who is connected to NSC for I140 application will update this thread.
Cheers!
JoshRaj
Starting this thread for NSC 140 applicants to track LUDs and Approvals.
The whole purpose of this thread is to get the indication of where NSC is with the appoval process for 140.
I hope every one who is connected to NSC for I140 application will update this thread.
Cheers!
JoshRaj
more...
pictures Pictures of COMPAQ EVO N610C
darsh678
10-27 11:10 AM
Hi
I fall in Schedule A which is going to retrogression begining Nov, 06.
I am on H4, meanwhile i just made it to file my I140, 485, 765 and AP concurenntly, hence will get my EAD, but no approved 485. My situation is I dont want to be with this employer for long for this is in upstate MI, where my spouse wont be able to continue the H1, hence we will be living seperate for sometime.
Now after my 140 approval and 485 pending for 6 months can i change the employer, I heard something with AC 21 you can. But what are the pros and cons with it.
Can my employer revoke the approved 140 after 6 months too.
I fall in Schedule A which is going to retrogression begining Nov, 06.
I am on H4, meanwhile i just made it to file my I140, 485, 765 and AP concurenntly, hence will get my EAD, but no approved 485. My situation is I dont want to be with this employer for long for this is in upstate MI, where my spouse wont be able to continue the H1, hence we will be living seperate for sometime.
Now after my 140 approval and 485 pending for 6 months can i change the employer, I heard something with AC 21 you can. But what are the pros and cons with it.
Can my employer revoke the approved 140 after 6 months too.
dresses tattoo Re: Compaq evo n610c
ssksubash
05-04 12:32 PM
Thank you
more...
makeup HP Compaq Evo N610c
gc28262
01-18 09:06 AM
https://help.cbp.gov/cgi-bin/customs.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=1160&p_created=1257459854&p_sid=uJzYJiSj&p_accessibility=0&p_redirect=&p_srch=1&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX 3Jvd19jbnQ9MTQ3LDE0NyZwX3Byb2RzPSZwX2NhdHM9JnBfcHY 9JnBfY3Y9JnBfcGFnZT0xJnBfc2VhcmNoX3RleHQ9Y29tcGxha W50IGFnYWluc3QgQ0JQIG9mZmljZXI!&p_li=&p_topview=1
You may submit a complaint or comment by clicking on the "Ask a Question" tab above.
You may submit a complaint or comment by clicking on the "Ask a Question" tab above.
girlfriend Battery Compaq Evo N610c
pcs
07-15 08:25 AM
done
hairstyles this is brand new compaq evo n610c laptop batteries replaces the compaq evo
Munna Bhai
06-20 09:06 AM
Can I use salary.com instead of flcdatacenter to determine the prevailing wage? Will immigration officer accept this source? Thanks
No, salary.com is not the right source, infact it may be higher too. Flcdatacenter is the correct one for prevailing wage.
No, salary.com is not the right source, infact it may be higher too. Flcdatacenter is the correct one for prevailing wage.
downloadzombie
06-14 10:36 PM
Hi All,
Seeems there is bigger gameplan around here..
a compromise has been reached between Democrats and Republics for CIR.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/14/congress.immigration.bill/index.html
Lets hope all those eligible for I485 get green card asap.
for rest (including me)we can hope that some amendments can bring relief.
IV I have to say only one thing "When going gets tough,tough get going"
All the best
Seeems there is bigger gameplan around here..
a compromise has been reached between Democrats and Republics for CIR.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/14/congress.immigration.bill/index.html
Lets hope all those eligible for I485 get green card asap.
for rest (including me)we can hope that some amendments can bring relief.
IV I have to say only one thing "When going gets tough,tough get going"
All the best
dealsnet
08-27 03:05 PM
You can file for your wife and kids while you have a GC.
For brother/sister/parents, you need US citizenship to file it.
If you are a Indian citizen, Bro/sister catagory need a minimum 10 year wait period after filing.
For brother/sister/parents, you need US citizenship to file it.
If you are a Indian citizen, Bro/sister catagory need a minimum 10 year wait period after filing.
No comments:
Post a Comment